Boolean Algebra

© All Rights Reserved

15 views

Boolean Algebra

© All Rights Reserved

- T2-01
- Logic Gates
- Python Programming in Context
- Simplifying Algebraic Expressions
- Pioneers in Computer Development
- 3rd sem cse
- chap2_2
- CSE396ps1
- tmp9D48
- Design of Sequential Circuits
- Logic
- Front
- Digital Logic Design-syllabus
- Multiplication and Division
- 05 Boolean Algebra
- LECTURE 5-SOP+POS
- 04_GATES1
- Knights and Knaves
- Logic and switching theory
- Logic and Proof Methods COPY

You are on page 1of 7

3 Boolean Algebra

In the previous section we looked at the eight logical operations: and, or, not,

exclusive-or, nand, nor, if-then and if-and-only-if. In this section we shall look at the

algebra of these operations. Recall, from the last section

For example, (p + q)(pq)' and pq' + p'q are logical expressions. Often we use a capital

letter, e.g. P or Q, to denote a logical expression. For example, we might write

P = (p + q)(pq)' or Q = pq' + p'q. In the following we shall just say expression for logical

expression if there is no danger of confusion with other types of exprssions such as

arithmetic expressions or mixed arithemetic/logical expressions.

Expressions are equivalent if they give the same result for every possible

combination of logical values for the logical variables appearing in them.

This occurs precisely if they have the same truth table. We write P = Q if P and Q are

equivalent. In the previous section we showed that (p + q)(pq)' = pq' + p'q.

identity.

Some of the equivalences that we showed in the previous section were the following.

(2) p nor q = (p + q)' = p'q'

(3) p q = (p q)(q p) = (p q)'

The right equivalences in (1) and (2) are called the DeMorgan laws. Here is a list of

some useful identities in Boolean algebra. The DeMorgan identities on the right of (1)

and (2) are included as formulas (7) in this list.

(5) p(qr) = (pq)r p + (q + r) = (p + q) + r associative laws

(6) p(q + r) = pq + pr p + (qr) = (p + q)(p + r) distributive laws

(7) (pq)' = p' + q' (p + q)' = p'q' DeMorgans laws

(8) p1 = p p+0 = p identity laws

(9) p0 = 0 p+1 = 1 domination laws

(10) pp = p p+p = p idempotent laws

(11) pp' = 0 p + p' = 1 negation laws

1.3 - 1

(12) (p')' = p double negation law (or involution law)

One of the main reasons we are interested in equivalences is because they give us

alternative ways to design logic circuits.

whose output is r = q + p'q'. r = q + p'q'

(11) and (8) we have

p

So a simpler circuit to produce r is the one at the r = q + p'

right.

q

whose output is r = q + p'q. r = q + p'q

(8) and (9) we have

For more applications of Boolean algebra to logic design, see Fundamentals of Logic

Design by Charles H. Roth, Jr. and published by Thomson.

Some of the equivalences in the list (4) (12) follow directly from the definition.

Consider pq = qp. The left side pq is 1 only if both p and q are 1. The right side qp is 1

only if both q and p are 1. However both p and q are 1 precisely if both q and p are 1. So

pq and qp are 1 under the same circumstances. So pq = qp.

The equivalences that are less obvious can be shown to be true using truth tables.

Example 3. Show the first distributive law is valid using a truth table.

p q r q+r p(q + r) pq pr pq + pr

At the right is the truth 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

table. Note that both 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0

p(q + r) and pq + pr are 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

true precisely in the last 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

three rows, i.e. in the 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1

following three cases. 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1.3 - 2

p = 1, q = 0, r = 1

p = 1, q = 1, r = 0

p = 1, q = 1, r = 1

The equivalences (4) (11) are examples of dual pairs of equivalences. Every logical

expression has a dual expression that is obtained by interchanging and and or and 0 and

1. For example, the dual of the expression p(q + r) is p + qr. One way to get the dual of

an expression is to do the following three steps.

1. complement the expression

2. Use the DeMorgan laws

3. Replace each variable by its complement

For example, if we do that with p(q + r) we get the following.

p' + q'r' p + qr

If two expressions are equivalent then the duals of the two expressions are equivalent. So

in each of the equivalence (4) (11) the right equivalence follows from the left and vice-

versa.

Example 4. Go through this argument to prove the commutative law for "or" from the

commutative law for "and".

We start with the commutative law for and, i.e. pq = qp. Next we not both sides giving

(pq)' = (qp)'. Next we use the first DeMorgan law giving p' + q' = q' + p'. Since this

holds for all p and q we can replace p by p' and q by q', giving p'' + q'' = q'' + p''. Finally

we use (12) which gives p + q = q + p.

In this argument we used some properties of equivalences that we usually use without

taking note that we are actually using them. Here are three useful properties of

equivalences.

First, suppose P = Q and P and Q contain the logical variable p and R is another

expression. If we replace all occurrences of p in P and Q by R the resulting expressions

are equivalent. In symbols

and similarly for Q//pR. We used (13) to go from p' + q' = q' + p' to p'' + q'' = q'' + p''.

some occurrences of P in R by Q then the resulting expression is equivalent. In symbols

1.3 - 3

Here R/PQ denotes the expression obtained by replacing some, but not necessarily all,

occurrences of P in R by Q. We used (14) to go from p'' + q'' = q'' + p'' to p + q = q + p.

Third, two expressions equivalent to the same expression are equivalent. In symbols

The commutative and associative laws are similar in structure to the commutative and

associative laws in regular algebra. So is the first of the two distributive laws in (6), i.e.

p(q + r) = pq + pr. However, the second, p + (qr) = (p + q)(p + r), is not true in regular

algebra. This is one thing that distinguishes Boolean algebra from regular algebra. The

reason p + (qr) = (p + q)(p + r) is called a distributive law is because it is obtained from

the first distributive law p(q + r) = pq + pr by interchanging + and ..

Problem 1. Make a truth table showing the second distributive law is valid. Show that

both sides are true in the last five rows if the first three columns are the same as the above

truth table.

Example 1. Suppose

q = the Lions win

r = the Red Wings win

(16) The Pistons win and either the Lions win or the Red Wings win

has the form p(q + r). The distributive law p(q + r) = pq + pr says that (16) is equivalent

to

(17) Either both the Pistons and Lions win or both the Pistons and Red Wings win

The pistons win, the Lions lose, the Red Wings win

The pistons win, the Lions win, the Red Wings lose

The pistons win, the Lions win, the Red Wings win

Example 2. On a certain river there are two sets of rapids. To go past the first set of

rapids boats must go through lock A. For the second set of rapids boats can choose

between lock B and lock C.

1.3 - 4

lock B

lock A lock C

To get by both sets of rapids boats must go through lock A and either lock B or lock C.

So to get by both sets of rapids the following statement must be true.

If we let

p = "Lock A is working"

q = "Lock B is working"

r = "Lock C is working"

then (18) has the form p(q + r). By the first distributive law this is equivalent to pq + pr.

Thus an alternative condition for a boat to get by both sets of is the following statement

be true.

Either both locks A and B are working or both locks A and C are working.

The algebra of exclusive-or. In many cases and, or and not are regarded as the most

basic of the logical operations and expressions involving the other operations are reduced

to expressions involving and, or and not. In which case the identities (4) (12) play an

important role. However, in some cases it is convenient to work with exclusive or. In

that case the following identities involving exclusive or are useful. Some of these are

similar to regular or while others are different.

(19) pq = qp commutative

(20) p (q r) = (p q) r associative

(21) p(q r) = pq pr distributive

(22) p0 = p zero is an identity

(23) pp = 0 p is its own inverse

(24) p 1 = p' exclusive or'ing with 1 inverts

(25) p p' = 1

1.3 - 5

(19), and (22) (25) can be proved using the definition of exclusive or. For example, the

commutative property is true since p q is 1 if exactly one of p and q is 1 and the same

is true for q p. Similarly, p 0 is 1 if exactly one of p and 0 is 1, i.e. if p is 1.

The associative and distributive properties can be shown to be true either using truth

tables or by expressing exclusive or in terms of and, or and not using p q = pq' + p'q

and using (4) (12).

p q r qr p (q r)

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 1 1 1

0 1 0 1 1

0 1 1 0 0

1 0 0 0 1

1 0 1 1 0

1 1 0 1 0

1 1 1 0 1

Now consider (p q) r. Using the commutative property for exclusive or, one has

(p q) r = r (p q). The right side has the form p (q r) but p, q and r are

replace by r, p and q respectively. From (26) it follows that r (p q) is 1 if an odd

number of r, p and q are 1. However, this occurs if an odd number of p, q and r are 1. So

p (q r) and (p q) r are both 1 if an odd number of p, q and r are 1. So they are

equivalent.

Remark 1. Because exclusive or satisfies the associative law we usually don't use

parentheses if we are exclusive or'ing more than two things. For example, we write

p q r for both p (q r) and (p q) r.

Let's show that this holds for n = 4. The proof of the general case is the same. Consider

p q r s. We want to show that

1.3 - 6

There are four cases. The first case is when p q r has an even number of 1's and

s = 0. Then p q r = 0 and p q r s = 0 and p q r s has an even number

of 1's. So (28) is true in the first case.

The second case is when p q r has an even number of 1's and s = 1. Then

p q r = 0 and p q r s = 1 and p q r s has an odd number of 1's. So

(28) is true in the second case.

The third case is when p q r has an odd number of 1's and s = 0. Then p q r = 1

and p q r s = 1 and p q r s has an odd number of 1's. So (28) is true in the

third case.

The last case is when p q r has an odd number of 1's and s = 1. Then p q r = 1

and p q r s = 0 and p q r s has an even number of 1's. So (28) is true in

this case.

Solution. We could do this with a truth table. However, let's do by expressing exclusive

or in terms of and, or and not and using properties (4) (12). In section (1.2) we showed

that p q = pq' + p'q. Using this one has

and

pq pr = pq(pr)' + (pq)'pr

Using DeMorgan, some of the other properties (4) (12) one has

= pqp' + pqr' + p'pr + q'pr

= pp'q + pqr' + pp'r + pq'r

= 0q + pqr' + 0r + pq'r

= 0 + pqr' + 0 + pq'r

= pqr' + pq'r

So p(q r) and pq pr are equivalent to the same thing and hence are equivalent.

1.3 - 7

- T2-01Uploaded byMaelae
- Logic GatesUploaded byShubham Tiwari
- Python Programming in ContextUploaded byIsmael Naranjo Veléz
- Simplifying Algebraic ExpressionsUploaded byfoobarxxx111
- 3rd sem cseUploaded byDeepak Varshney
- Pioneers in Computer DevelopmentUploaded byTalha Shaukat
- chap2_2Uploaded bybadhell_18
- CSE396ps1Uploaded byEdwin Velasquez
- tmp9D48Uploaded byFrontiers
- Design of Sequential CircuitsUploaded byRaj Roy
- LogicUploaded byGagan Gupta
- FrontUploaded byKamal Deo Prasad
- Digital Logic Design-syllabusUploaded bySri Mathi
- Multiplication and DivisionUploaded byS TANCRED
- 05 Boolean AlgebraUploaded byAileen May Santillan Herrera
- LECTURE 5-SOP+POSUploaded byIwan Cuffysargeant
- 04_GATES1Uploaded byAdasebuahkisah Tentangseoranganak Namanyaanpanman
- Knights and KnavesUploaded byJitesh Emmanuel
- Logic and switching theoryUploaded bySatish Bojjawar
- Logic and Proof Methods COPYUploaded byJovenill Granton VII
- PropositionUploaded byWewew11
- Solids and Semiconductor DevicesUploaded byKashyap Patel
- Text grammar and text logic.pdfUploaded byAlma Martín

- G. R. Owst Preaching in Medieval England An Introduction to Sermon Manuscripts of the Period c.1350-1450 Cambridge Library Collection - History .pdfUploaded byPablo Daniel Guzman
- Air Compressors NotesUploaded byHafizuddin Razak
- Roki Patel Sap SdUploaded bysatya149
- Timeline of Probability and StatisticsUploaded byGolamKibriabipu
- Draft ReportUploaded byDanudear Daniel
- FellowsUploaded byGustavo Rasso
- NMAT Mock Exam for ChemUploaded byShaira Aguilar Cariño
- Control - Control of Ventilation and Air Conditioning - SiemensUploaded byntt_121987
- Lets Knit October 2017Uploaded byEdgarGarcia
- CCTV PolicyUploaded byKeenanMartinez
- IEC 60567Uploaded bySachin Wani
- expt2 partially miscible liquidsUploaded byJean Criste Cainila
- CIM_5200_14A US Coast Guard HeraldryUploaded bydieudecafe
- parle gUploaded byVikas Bhadauria
- Alternative Certificate - Foundation Competences ProtectedUploaded byFlavian Costin
- groundwaterUploaded byZeensoni Yusof
- yeast bread recipesUploaded byact
- 18632 IntroductionUploaded byAyush Chopra
- food safety education lesson powerpointUploaded byapi-354139540
- 20170915_165017_anr_6.32(63200008)_0Uploaded bysamueldejesusnavu
- Types of VirtualizationUploaded byClydee DeCastro Vegh
- Classification and Regression TreesUploaded bynectar1978
- Lakoff_Why It MattersUploaded byTow Teck Soon
- Actix PresentationUploaded bySarfaraz Akram
- Absolute-Value Circuit Using JunctionUploaded byxongassilva
- Japantown Cultureal Heritage and Economic Sustainability StrategyUploaded bySan Francisco Examiner
- Huawei ESpace Unified Communications Solution V2.2 Protocol Compliance List (5)Uploaded byHarjinder Singh
- Are You Hanging Pathogens Around Your Patients NeckUploaded byDentalLearning
- Lease Contract - Braulio LimUploaded byMartin Martel
- Implementation of High Reliable 6T SRAM Cell DesignUploaded byInternational Organization of Scientific Research (IOSR)